On Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:10:37 +0000 Edward Cree wrote: > Yep, I had noticed. Was wondering how the removal of the old > [sg]et_rxfh_context functions would interact with my new API, > which has three ops (create/modify/delete) and thus can't > really be wedged into the [sg]et_rxfh() like that. Set side looks fairly straightforward. Get is indeed more tricky. > Tbh I'd rather move in the direction of using the new API (and > associated state-in-core) for everything, even context 0, so > that the behaviour is consistent between default and custom > contexts for NICs that support the latter. Not 100% sure how > exactly that would work in practice yet though; drivers are > currently responsible for populating ctx 0 (indir, key, etc) > at probe time so how do you read that state into the core? We can try to slowly move drivers over from the "pull model" to a "push model" where they inform the core about the change they have made. The main thing to worry about will probably be the indirection table, as queues get reconfigured. Maybe we can tie the switch over to the multi-context support? Or wait with the conversion until the new API gets some use for the non-0 context.. > And I promise v5 of the rework is coming eventually, bosses > just keep prioritising everything but this :( Right, which is why I'm not asking Ahmed to worry about/wait for your work :)
